4.7 Article

Comparison of graft-versus-host-disease and survival after HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplantation in ethnic populations

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 105, Issue 4, Pages 1408-1416

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2004-06-2385

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [U24-CA76518] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The association of ethnicity with the incidence of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) and other clinical outcomes after transplantation is controversial. We compared the results of HLA-identical sibling bone marrow transplantations for leukemia, performed between 1990 and 1999, among different ethnic populations, including 562 Japanese, 829 white Americans, 71 African Americans, 195 Scandinavians, and 95 Irish. Results for adults and children were analyzed separately. Multivariate analyses of adult patients showed that white Americans, African Americans, and Irish cohorts were at significantly higher risk for acute GVHD than Japanese or Scandinavian cohorts (relative risk [RR] = 1.77, P < .001; RR = 1.84, P < .006; R R = 2.22, P < .001, respectively). White Americans, African Americans, and Irish, but not Scandinavians, were at significantly higher risk for early (within 3 months of transplantation) transplant-related mortality (TRM) compared with Japanese (RR = 2.99, P < .001; RR = 5.88, P < .001; RR = 2.66, P < .009, respectively). No differences in the risk for chronic GVHD, relapse, and overall survival were noted. In the pediatric cohort (limited to Japanese and white Americans), white Americans were at significantly higher risk for acute (RR = 1.93; P = .04) and chronic (RR = 3.16; P = .002) GVHD. No differences in other clinical outcomes were noted. Our findings suggest that ethnicity may influence the risk for GVHD, though overall survival rates after transplantation remain similar. (C) 2005 by The American Society of Hematology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available